On Sat, 12 Nov 1994, Don Soucy wrote: > > In my mail this immediately followed two items from Eric in response to the > > person looking for extremely tight list security. One person wanting > > absolutely no outsiders and then someone who can't wait for new software > > that will allow him easier access as an outsider. > > I suppose if you look on the darkside, software that helps access Listserv > lists does make it easier to abuse our lists. On the other hand, it > increases access and can decentarlize control of knowledge. Furthermore, > I didn't come across anything in the InfoMagnet demo that I couldn't > otherwise do with our regular listserv tools. I have a very vivid imagination (I'm not saying you don't) and the first things I think of are all the ways new items can be abused (don't have to think about the good ways they can be used as those are usually well documented). Even if all InfoMagnet and other software of its sort (and I include "Internet interface" software in that) do is what one already can do with simple commands already available, but allows one to do it at the press of a button, I still see enormous possibilities for abuse, in that those out for a quick buck, who would not bother otherwise, can use it to get in and out quickly, and have gotten their money before they are stopped. And, if I remember correctly, the gentleman developing InfoMagnet, when he was asking questions on this list a while ago, indicated he wanted to have some features which would more or less create a database of the desired information which had been gleaned from the lists. I'm not really a doom-n-gloomer, but I always keep it in mind, as there are many out there who, if it's too much trouble, will do nothing wrong, but if you make it really easy, and they think they can get something for nothing, will try to do so. > > I don't consider non-subscribers to my dozen or so lists to be > "outsiders." In fact, one of our lists is a database with no > subscribers. For most of these lists, the archives are turned on. > I'd be happy for subscribers and non-subscribers to dig through and > see whether there are any treasures in there. As for our confidential > lists, we either have the archives set to private or we don't archive it > at all. > > While I oppose those who would abuse Listserv subscription lists, I > applaud software that makes it easier for more people, including my > students and me, to take advantage of the goldmine of resources built up > on Listserv lists. There is absolutely no objection to any non subscriber searching our notebooks for cataloging information, if that is what is needed. The primary listowner and I even have copies of an entire year of the notebooks which had to be removed from the host site due to lack of space, just in case anyone needs them (all you need do is ask, though you might be asked why you want them). When we have to dump, sooner or later, another year of notebooks we will undoubtedly store those privately also, so that those who need legitimate access to them will have it. Access for legitimate research purposes is not in question, which is why our subscription, notebooks and review are still open, though we did, reluctantly, change send so that only those directly subscribed may post directly while all others go through me as editor. > > I'd go one step further. I hope that InfoMagnet-search-type software is > developed so that the Listserv goldmine can be accessed through the World > Wide Web. The various search programs now developed and being developed are fine. I am not saying they should not exist, nor be developed. But all such things can be abused. Our list, a professional discussion group of some years standing, which has developed a certain "feel" or tradition, and is not only required reading for some classes and a field for class assigned projects, but also sometimes a "court of last resort" for complaint to or about the field's "authorities," has clearly stated, through surveys I have conducted, that we, the listowners, should do what we can to block any sort of misuse of the list. If new searching software is used only for legitimate research in the field our list covers, without inappropriate use of what is found, fine, I'm all for it. But if it becomes obvious that it is being misused, in whatever manner, we will have to think about blocking it as we can. > > Don Soucy > [log in to unmask] > If you have bothered to read this far, a little apology for the length. I get started on "philosophical" matters I have trouble stopping, as I can always think of another slant on the problem which I haven't yet mentioned. Best I don't get started, but sometimes I can't stop myself. Douglas Douglas Winship Austin, Texas [log in to unmask] Secondary AUTOCAT Listowner